Anesthesia, Articaine, Buccal Infiltration
Conditions
Keywords
Buccal infiltration, Articaine
Brief summary
This study compares the effectiveness of two different volumes of buccal infiltration of Articaine for the extraction of mandibular posterior teeth. One group receives buccal infiltration of 1.8 ml of 4% Articaine and the other group receives buccal infiltration of 3.6 ml of 4% Articaine.
Detailed description
The most widely and commonly used injection method for the extraction of mandibular posterior teeth is the inferior alveolar nerve block (IANB) technique. However, various complications like pain during injection, transient facial nerve paralysis, trismus, hematoma, and paresthesia are associated with the inferior alveolar nerve block technique. Local infiltration technique has been proven as a safer and less painful anesthetic injection technique compared to IANB. Unfortunately, the dense nature of cortical bone in the mandibular posterior region hinders sufficient diffusion of anesthetic solution during infiltration. Thus, to achieve an adequate anesthesia for a painless dental extraction of mandibular posterior teeth by infiltration technique, a strong and effective local anesthetic agent having a deeper penetrating property should be used. Articaine is one of the most widely used local anesthetic agents. It is more potent and has shown more success rate than Lidocaine and Mepivacaine in providing anesthesia in mandibular and maxillary posterior teeth by buccal infiltration diffusibility. This study compares the effectiveness of two different volumes of buccal infiltration of Articaine for the extraction of mandibular posterior teeth.
Interventions
OTHER1.8 ml of 4% Articaine
Buccal infiltration of 1.8 ml of 4% Articaine
OTHER3.6 ml of 4% Articaine
Buccal infiltration of 3.6 ml of 4% Articaine.
Sponsors
Qassim University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* All healthy patients (ASA I) or patients with mild systemic disease with no functional limitations (ASA II) * Patients aged ≥ 18 years of age. * Patients requiring extraction of mandibular posterior teeth including grossly decayed tooth, grade I mobile tooth, root stumps and indicated for therapeutic reasons. * Patients not allergic to the drugs or anesthetic agents used in the surgery.
Exclusion criteria
* Acute infection at the extraction site. * Patients indicated for surgical extraction of teeth. * Patients already taking medications affecting pain assessment. * Pregnant patients.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Intensity of pain | From reflection of mucoperiosteum till delivery of tooth out of socket. | VAS scale is a validated scale measuring pain with possible score range from 0 (no pain) to 100 (severe pain). |
| Time of onset of anesthesia | upto 10 minutes | It will be assessed by probing buccal and lingual soft tissue using a dental explorer every 2 minutes after infiltration using a standard digital stop clock. |
| Presence or absence of pain | From reflection of mucoperiosteum till delivery of tooth out of socket. | A 100 mm Numerical rating scale assessing intraoperative pain. Possible score ranges from 0 (no pain) to 100 (worst possible pain). |
Countries
Saudi Arabia
Contacts
Primary ContactMuhammad Atif S Agwan
Backup ContactAbdul K Azad
Outcome results
None listed